I'll repeat what I wrote in
The ‘end game’? topic:
People practice audiophilia for a multitude of reasons: some like vintage equipment, others crave for the latest gear, some are tweakers and DIY'ers while others are brand addicts, some like rock, some electronic, others prefer jazz or classical, some like analog others digital, tubes or transistors, some are tech savvy and have a more rational approach while a few more will go at it in a mostly subjective manner, some are well-off while many suffer from budget constraints... On top of this, a large number of audiophiles will probably shift their objectives back and forth throughout their lives.
The construction of an audio (or recorded music playback) system is a personal journey, guided by our own objectives and our tastes (in both music and in sonic presentation).
My path has combined the possible experimentation with some research on technical documentation and reading accounts of a few select individual experiences.
The development of my system has been growing towards an approach that is driven by two major concepts: "transparency" (measureable faithfulness to the recorded signal) and "naturalness" (audible "realism").
I find that to achieve musical expressiveness and sonic realism one must first get as much information from the support as we possible can.
My sonic objectives are governed by the music genre which I appreciate the most, classical, with a special emphasis on symphonic music of the Romantic period, piano (solo or in concert), cello (accompanied by piano or the orchestra) and also some music with vocal content (opera and songs). I also listen to some jazz and ethnic/traditional, and a bit of alternative & rock (though mostly as background). I have a strong dislike for commercial pop, rap, electronic and ambiance music.
From an audiophile point of view, the advantage of employing classical (acoustic music played in spaces with natural reverberation) is that it can be used as a sonic reference in the evaluation of equipment, systems and recordings; it usually benefits from careful recording and mastering, unlike most studio recordings that only "exist" as they exit the mixer and are meastered with excessive loudness, compression and clipping, or in the amplified concerts where the sound heard by the audience is a "reproduction" of what was captured by the microphones or the table, amplified to absurd levels and transduced by PA systems that do not have fidelity but loudness as their main objective.
Moreover, the sonic and musical complexity, the wide frequency band, the wide dynamic range, the variety of timbres and sound sources of classical music and the venue ambience cues provide a particularly demanding challenge both to its recording and subsequent reproduction in a domestic environment.
Having "natural" playback of classical music as a goal, I expect my system to reproduce recordings with the highest possible fidelity and to achieve this it is necessary to choose equipment topologies that offer the greatest potential and to seek the maximum technical excellence in each of them (within my budget, of course).
Ideally this would mean a frequency response covering the whole range of human hearing (20-20,000Hz), a dynamic range limited only by the recording and the listening room background noise, with negligible amounts of the various distortions, in such a way as to allow the "clarity" and the transient response needed to produce sounds as "naturally" as possible.
But if on the one hand this technical excellence implies an absolute "respect" for signal integrity, I am also aware that the whole system (from recording to playback) is imperfect and that it requires a certain degree of customization/compromise in order to achive a more "musical" result.
I find that this is best done at the end of the chain (speakers) by adjusting frequency response and dispersion but I would also like to experiment with "euphonic distortion" at some point (amplification).
Regarding the sources I am of the opinion that this equipment should be as transparent as possible in order to extract the maximum amount of information from the support whilst contaminating the signal as little as possible with any type of distortion.
This means that a single recording reproduced from CD or vinyl should only be distinguished by the "colourations" or distortions inherent in each of the systems (media and reading equipment).
The amplification should follow the same principle of "transparency" in its function of increasing the amplitude of the signal coming from the source, being able to power the speakers to which it is connected (which implies sufficient headroom to respond to transients and low impedance of output in order to prevent any influence from the load produced by the speakers, which varies according to frequency) and the power supply must be adequately sized and effective in filtering the "impurities" of the electric current (the power amplification modulates the intensity of the electric current of in accordance with the audio signal).
All electronic circuits should be guided by simplicity (k.i.s.s.) and use the components that present the best characteristics / technical performance.
As for transduction, unless I win the lottery I will be sticking to front radiation speakers.
Here's a summary listing of some characteristics that I consider indispensable for a good performance:
• The case should have a wide baffle to avoid "discontinuities" in the response at the mid / mid-high level (baffle step) where the ear is most sensitive, a construction that allows control of resonances and standing waves and edges rounded or bevelled to reduce diffraction
• a minimum of 3 ways in order to reduce intermodulation distortion and make use each of driver within it's optimal passband
• frequency response should be flat on-axis and smooth off-axis to ensure a balanced tone in the room
• large (or medium-sized pair) of low-frequency drivers in sealed compartment for better transient response
• the material used in the diaphragm of the speakers should not produce audible distortions at break-up (whether paper, carbon, kevlar, ceramic, aluminium, polypropylene or bextrene, any material introduces a "colouration" of its own and I think it is not It is inappropriate to associate the tonality of this "coloration" with the material in question)
.
As others have written, I am also happy with my current system and easily could live with it to old age. But there are aspect of performance that I know can be improved, some are more important than others. The most important one – room – will hopefully be addressed when I move in August.
My DAC is the weakest link in my system and will be replaced in the near future, though a move in August to a larger house may allow the return to larger speakers with better sub-bass performance than that of my current pair.
I am quite happy with my current amplifier.
To use a automotive analogy, I see my system as a race car; the highest performance car will produce the fastest lap, the highest performance system will achieve the highest fidelity or "transparency". If I were to race on a Grand Touring cup and didn't have budget constraints I'd buy a Ferrari or a McLaren but unfortunatelly I can only afford a Lotus or a BMW...
